Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21626283›Full record

ArticleCytotechnology2011

Optimizing culture conditions of a porcine epithelial cell line IPEC-J2 through a histological and physiological characterization.

Marisa M Geens, Theo A Niewold

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cytotechnology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

55 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Journal of agricultural and food chemistry · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Conditionally immortalised equine skeletal muscle cell lines forBiochemistry and biophysics reports · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Identification of mutations in porcineFrontiers in veterinary science · 2022
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Marisa M GeensDivision of Livestock-Nutrition-Quality, Department of Biosystems, K.U. Leuven, Kasteelpark Arenberg 30-bus 2456, 3001, Heverlee, Belgium, marisa.geens@biw.kuleuven.be.
Theo A Niewold

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The high similarity between pigs and humans makes pigs a good gastrointestinal (GI) model for humans. Recently an epithelial cell line originating from the jejunum of pig (IPEC-J2) became available. Once validated, this model can be used to investigate the complex interactions occurring in the intestine. The advantages of using IPEC-J2 as in vitro model of the GI tract are the high resemblance between humans and pigs, and the ease of extrapolating in vitro to in vivo characteristics. In this study, the IPEC-J2 cells were functionally characterized by measuring the trans-epithelial electrical resistance (TEER), and by histological and ultrastructural studies. IPEC-J2 cells grown on six different permeable support systems, were investigated. The Transwell(®)-COL collagen-coated membrane (1.12 cm(2)) showed the best results concerning time efficiency and TEER values. The optimum seeding density of 12 × 10(5) cells/mL ensured that after 9 days of differentiation a confluent monolayer was formed. The decrease in TEER values after a maximum had been reached, coincided with the ultrastructural development of apical microvilli. We conclude that IPEC-J2 cells grown on collagen-coated membranes represent a valuable in vitro model system for the small intestinal epithelium which can be of great interest for intestinal research.

Identifiers

PMID21626283
PMCPMC3140839

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.